Tchebyshev inequality for Measure theory.
$begingroup$
Suppose $f$ integrable on measurable set $E$ and $f(x)$ $geq$ $0$ on $E$,
And for any $a in mathbb{R}^+$, we define:
$E_a$ = ${x in E$ $vert$ $f(x) > a}$. (which is measurable by basic principles)
Show that $m(E_a) leq frac{1}{a} int_E f(x)$. ($m$ is Leb Meas)
here is what I have:
Pf:
Since
$a$ $chi_{E_a}$ $leq f(x)$ ($because$ of the fact: $x in E_a$)
by integrating both sides over $E$ we obtain
$a int_E chi_{E_a}$ $leq$ $int_E f(x)$
and by definition, we rewrite the LHS and have:
$m(E_a) leq frac{1}{a} int_E f(x)$
does this work?
a classmate said I have to consider an infinite case too? but then
$int_{E_a} a chi_{E_a cap [-n,n]}$ goes off to infinity?
not sure I get this part, is my part correct? thanks in advance!
real-analysis measure-theory lebesgue-integral lebesgue-measure
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose $f$ integrable on measurable set $E$ and $f(x)$ $geq$ $0$ on $E$,
And for any $a in mathbb{R}^+$, we define:
$E_a$ = ${x in E$ $vert$ $f(x) > a}$. (which is measurable by basic principles)
Show that $m(E_a) leq frac{1}{a} int_E f(x)$. ($m$ is Leb Meas)
here is what I have:
Pf:
Since
$a$ $chi_{E_a}$ $leq f(x)$ ($because$ of the fact: $x in E_a$)
by integrating both sides over $E$ we obtain
$a int_E chi_{E_a}$ $leq$ $int_E f(x)$
and by definition, we rewrite the LHS and have:
$m(E_a) leq frac{1}{a} int_E f(x)$
does this work?
a classmate said I have to consider an infinite case too? but then
$int_{E_a} a chi_{E_a cap [-n,n]}$ goes off to infinity?
not sure I get this part, is my part correct? thanks in advance!
real-analysis measure-theory lebesgue-integral lebesgue-measure
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose $f$ integrable on measurable set $E$ and $f(x)$ $geq$ $0$ on $E$,
And for any $a in mathbb{R}^+$, we define:
$E_a$ = ${x in E$ $vert$ $f(x) > a}$. (which is measurable by basic principles)
Show that $m(E_a) leq frac{1}{a} int_E f(x)$. ($m$ is Leb Meas)
here is what I have:
Pf:
Since
$a$ $chi_{E_a}$ $leq f(x)$ ($because$ of the fact: $x in E_a$)
by integrating both sides over $E$ we obtain
$a int_E chi_{E_a}$ $leq$ $int_E f(x)$
and by definition, we rewrite the LHS and have:
$m(E_a) leq frac{1}{a} int_E f(x)$
does this work?
a classmate said I have to consider an infinite case too? but then
$int_{E_a} a chi_{E_a cap [-n,n]}$ goes off to infinity?
not sure I get this part, is my part correct? thanks in advance!
real-analysis measure-theory lebesgue-integral lebesgue-measure
$endgroup$
Suppose $f$ integrable on measurable set $E$ and $f(x)$ $geq$ $0$ on $E$,
And for any $a in mathbb{R}^+$, we define:
$E_a$ = ${x in E$ $vert$ $f(x) > a}$. (which is measurable by basic principles)
Show that $m(E_a) leq frac{1}{a} int_E f(x)$. ($m$ is Leb Meas)
here is what I have:
Pf:
Since
$a$ $chi_{E_a}$ $leq f(x)$ ($because$ of the fact: $x in E_a$)
by integrating both sides over $E$ we obtain
$a int_E chi_{E_a}$ $leq$ $int_E f(x)$
and by definition, we rewrite the LHS and have:
$m(E_a) leq frac{1}{a} int_E f(x)$
does this work?
a classmate said I have to consider an infinite case too? but then
$int_{E_a} a chi_{E_a cap [-n,n]}$ goes off to infinity?
not sure I get this part, is my part correct? thanks in advance!
real-analysis measure-theory lebesgue-integral lebesgue-measure
real-analysis measure-theory lebesgue-integral lebesgue-measure
edited Dec 10 '18 at 23:23
Hossien Sahebjame
asked Dec 10 '18 at 22:34
Hossien SahebjameHossien Sahebjame
888
888
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
everything looks fine, you do not have to consider the infinite case since if the integral of f is not finite, then you have the claim trivially. If the integral of the indicator of function over the set you are given is infinte, then by monotonicity of the integral also the integral of f is infinite and again it holds :D
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
awesome thanks so much!! I see so the infinite case is the trivial case of the inequality? so for my finite case I had, that looks correct? I just need to include the infinite and say why it trivially holds, thanks@
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:11
$begingroup$
but I see what you mean, so this proof would suffice for the measure theoretic Tchebyshev inequality?
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:12
$begingroup$
I think so, anyway look at Markov inequality which is a general version of the tchebichev :D
$endgroup$
– anonymous
Dec 12 '18 at 10:22
$begingroup$
awesome thanks!
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 12 '18 at 15:59
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3034587%2ftchebyshev-inequality-for-measure-theory%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
everything looks fine, you do not have to consider the infinite case since if the integral of f is not finite, then you have the claim trivially. If the integral of the indicator of function over the set you are given is infinte, then by monotonicity of the integral also the integral of f is infinite and again it holds :D
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
awesome thanks so much!! I see so the infinite case is the trivial case of the inequality? so for my finite case I had, that looks correct? I just need to include the infinite and say why it trivially holds, thanks@
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:11
$begingroup$
but I see what you mean, so this proof would suffice for the measure theoretic Tchebyshev inequality?
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:12
$begingroup$
I think so, anyway look at Markov inequality which is a general version of the tchebichev :D
$endgroup$
– anonymous
Dec 12 '18 at 10:22
$begingroup$
awesome thanks!
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 12 '18 at 15:59
add a comment |
$begingroup$
everything looks fine, you do not have to consider the infinite case since if the integral of f is not finite, then you have the claim trivially. If the integral of the indicator of function over the set you are given is infinte, then by monotonicity of the integral also the integral of f is infinite and again it holds :D
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
awesome thanks so much!! I see so the infinite case is the trivial case of the inequality? so for my finite case I had, that looks correct? I just need to include the infinite and say why it trivially holds, thanks@
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:11
$begingroup$
but I see what you mean, so this proof would suffice for the measure theoretic Tchebyshev inequality?
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:12
$begingroup$
I think so, anyway look at Markov inequality which is a general version of the tchebichev :D
$endgroup$
– anonymous
Dec 12 '18 at 10:22
$begingroup$
awesome thanks!
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 12 '18 at 15:59
add a comment |
$begingroup$
everything looks fine, you do not have to consider the infinite case since if the integral of f is not finite, then you have the claim trivially. If the integral of the indicator of function over the set you are given is infinte, then by monotonicity of the integral also the integral of f is infinite and again it holds :D
$endgroup$
everything looks fine, you do not have to consider the infinite case since if the integral of f is not finite, then you have the claim trivially. If the integral of the indicator of function over the set you are given is infinte, then by monotonicity of the integral also the integral of f is infinite and again it holds :D
answered Dec 10 '18 at 22:57
anonymousanonymous
361
361
$begingroup$
awesome thanks so much!! I see so the infinite case is the trivial case of the inequality? so for my finite case I had, that looks correct? I just need to include the infinite and say why it trivially holds, thanks@
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:11
$begingroup$
but I see what you mean, so this proof would suffice for the measure theoretic Tchebyshev inequality?
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:12
$begingroup$
I think so, anyway look at Markov inequality which is a general version of the tchebichev :D
$endgroup$
– anonymous
Dec 12 '18 at 10:22
$begingroup$
awesome thanks!
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 12 '18 at 15:59
add a comment |
$begingroup$
awesome thanks so much!! I see so the infinite case is the trivial case of the inequality? so for my finite case I had, that looks correct? I just need to include the infinite and say why it trivially holds, thanks@
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:11
$begingroup$
but I see what you mean, so this proof would suffice for the measure theoretic Tchebyshev inequality?
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:12
$begingroup$
I think so, anyway look at Markov inequality which is a general version of the tchebichev :D
$endgroup$
– anonymous
Dec 12 '18 at 10:22
$begingroup$
awesome thanks!
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 12 '18 at 15:59
$begingroup$
awesome thanks so much!! I see so the infinite case is the trivial case of the inequality? so for my finite case I had, that looks correct? I just need to include the infinite and say why it trivially holds, thanks@
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:11
$begingroup$
awesome thanks so much!! I see so the infinite case is the trivial case of the inequality? so for my finite case I had, that looks correct? I just need to include the infinite and say why it trivially holds, thanks@
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:11
$begingroup$
but I see what you mean, so this proof would suffice for the measure theoretic Tchebyshev inequality?
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:12
$begingroup$
but I see what you mean, so this proof would suffice for the measure theoretic Tchebyshev inequality?
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 10 '18 at 23:12
$begingroup$
I think so, anyway look at Markov inequality which is a general version of the tchebichev :D
$endgroup$
– anonymous
Dec 12 '18 at 10:22
$begingroup$
I think so, anyway look at Markov inequality which is a general version of the tchebichev :D
$endgroup$
– anonymous
Dec 12 '18 at 10:22
$begingroup$
awesome thanks!
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 12 '18 at 15:59
$begingroup$
awesome thanks!
$endgroup$
– Hossien Sahebjame
Dec 12 '18 at 15:59
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3034587%2ftchebyshev-inequality-for-measure-theory%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown